Do Intel confirmed that they will build fab in Germany or in general in EU ? That was expected before latest Ohio fab was announced. So, Ohio fab simply exclude building fab in EU / Germany.
Make no mistake, Intel will not build anything or do anything for the EU until it gets it's f*king money back. That better come in the form of about $3B in tax breaks and other incentives. Pat was there when they stole nearly $2B from Intel, now it's payback time.
‘Stole’ lol, Intel committed grand fraud and bribery and they were barely punished. I agree that they will definitely demand the ruling be overturned to get a fab investment in Europe, but that’s just more Intel corruption.
> there is an implication that Sapphire Rapids > may not ship until after AMD’s Genoa server processors.
Wow. That's not good. It could be a repeat of what we saw with Ice Lake SP, where they're having to pitch it based on features like AMX, DSA, and CXL support, rather than overall benchmark domination.
They'll still sell every one they can make, but it could affect their market segmentation strategy or selling prices, both of which we saw with Ice Lake SP. It won't help that the HBM versions also won't be launching at the same time.
Yeah, this. There are plenty of reasons/times where governments handouts are terrible or corrupt, but when your competitors are being directly subsidized by their own state level actors isn’t one of them.
TW government played a big role is in funding TSMC more than 30 years ago. But TSMC has grown using self-generated funds and private debt in the past 2 decades. Samsung's foundry business is financed other more profitable business divisions like memory. Samsung is not getting paid by the Korean government to keep its foundry afloat
south korea just announced they're subsidizing $450B in semiconductor expansion, so yes they are very much supported by korea.
I also don't know how you would be able to make sense of TSMC's earnings reports if they aren't being subsidized by some unknown party. Their 12 month trailing revenue is actually lower than intel (for now) and they've spent 40 billion already with no hit to their financials at all. Meanwhile Intel is eating a 20 billion capex increase and dropping down to near 50% margin. The numbers don't add up if the money is coming straight from TSMC.
(a) The most successful examples of government-aided industry (from Japan in the 50s to Taiwan in the 80s) have had the money handed over in some sort of highly conditional way. (For example the money may be tied to company export revenues, if the country is trying to boost exports.) Unconditional money has had a much more mixed track record; sometimes doing well when directed at exceptional companies, but usually making the targets fat and lazy.
- What are the conditions associated with the money being given by the US govt to Intel? - The usual US structure for conditionality (on the rare occasions it exists) is ONLY around providing a certain level of jobs. Which may be good politics, but ain't the greatest incentive for building the best semiconductor tech in the world...
(b) Claims of govt support for TSMC seem overblown. As far as I can tell, in recent times these consist of JAPAN and THE US (not Taiwan) providing the usual sorts of tax rebates and suchlike for new fabs. There was Taiwanese government help top get started many years ago (1987), but after that the primary support mechanism seems to have been support for R&D and encouraging the universities to support directions that work with where TSMC is headed.
If you're going to keep going on about "Taiwanese govt funding of TSMC" I think the onus is on you to provide some data and some explanations as to this claim. Because as far as I can see it is baseless.
US already pushed conditions without even passing the chips act. They wanted to expand wafer production in china and were told not to. It seems contingent on US oversight.
For correction on the analysis. Gross margin is the difference between revenue income from sales minus only direct production costs, labour, materials etc.
The margin drop could be a number of factors. For one example, higher materials cost during current substrate shortage. If this was unable to be offset adequately enough by higher ASP cost then this would be a negative financially. Pressure from AMD might have limited Intel's position to raise prices enough.
R&D and any other expenditure for future facilities etc comes out in part from Net Income, which is why this has probably dropped as it invests its way out of its current foundry position.
Uhhhh ... The "Fairchild 7" (or 8?) led the way in out-sourcing in the 1950s and 1960s, primarily to Malaysia and Hong Kong. In the USA, IC development was seriously funded by subsidies, incentives and tax breaks with the military (DARPA) the space program(s), and Nuke development. --SO-- I guess it is dependent on 'whose ox is being gored' globally at the local, state and federal levels ...
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
18 Comments
Back to Article
TristanSDX - Wednesday, January 26, 2022 - link
Do Intel confirmed that they will build fab in Germany or in general in EU ? That was expected before latest Ohio fab was announced. So, Ohio fab simply exclude building fab in EU / Germany.jjjag - Wednesday, January 26, 2022 - link
Make no mistake, Intel will not build anything or do anything for the EU until it gets it's f*king money back. That better come in the form of about $3B in tax breaks and other incentives. Pat was there when they stole nearly $2B from Intel, now it's payback time.Sahrin - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
‘Stole’ lol, Intel committed grand fraud and bribery and they were barely punished. I agree that they will definitely demand the ruling be overturned to get a fab investment in Europe, but that’s just more Intel corruption.mode_13h - Wednesday, January 26, 2022 - link
> there is an implication that Sapphire Rapids> may not ship until after AMD’s Genoa server processors.
Wow. That's not good. It could be a repeat of what we saw with Ice Lake SP, where they're having to pitch it based on features like AMX, DSA, and CXL support, rather than overall benchmark domination.
They'll still sell every one they can make, but it could affect their market segmentation strategy or selling prices, both of which we saw with Ice Lake SP. It won't help that the HBM versions also won't be launching at the same time.
usiname - Wednesday, January 26, 2022 - link
Don't worry, just add the government funding and this will be the best year in intel's historym53 - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
May be the Taiwanese and Korean governments should stop funding TSMC and Samsung, respectively. Then Intel won’t need US funding.Drumsticks - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
Yeah, this. There are plenty of reasons/times where governments handouts are terrible or corrupt, but when your competitors are being directly subsidized by their own state level actors isn’t one of them.ammaterasu - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
TW government played a big role is in funding TSMC more than 30 years ago. But TSMC has grown using self-generated funds and private debt in the past 2 decades. Samsung's foundry business is financed other more profitable business divisions like memory. Samsung is not getting paid by the Korean government to keep its foundry afloatwhatthe123 - Friday, January 28, 2022 - link
south korea just announced they're subsidizing $450B in semiconductor expansion, so yes they are very much supported by korea.I also don't know how you would be able to make sense of TSMC's earnings reports if they aren't being subsidized by some unknown party. Their 12 month trailing revenue is actually lower than intel (for now) and they've spent 40 billion already with no hit to their financials at all. Meanwhile Intel is eating a 20 billion capex increase and dropping down to near 50% margin. The numbers don't add up if the money is coming straight from TSMC.
Kvaern1 - Saturday, January 29, 2022 - link
TSMC has a major capex benefactor, the worlds richest company.name99 - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
(a) The most successful examples of government-aided industry (from Japan in the 50s to Taiwan in the 80s) have had the money handed over in some sort of highly conditional way.(For example the money may be tied to company export revenues, if the country is trying to boost exports.)
Unconditional money has had a much more mixed track record; sometimes doing well when directed at exceptional companies, but usually making the targets fat and lazy.
- What are the conditions associated with the money being given by the US govt to Intel?
- The usual US structure for conditionality (on the rare occasions it exists) is ONLY around providing a certain level of jobs. Which may be good politics, but ain't the greatest incentive for building the best semiconductor tech in the world...
(b) Claims of govt support for TSMC seem overblown. As far as I can tell, in recent times these consist of JAPAN and THE US (not Taiwan) providing the usual sorts of tax rebates and suchlike for new fabs. There was Taiwanese government help top get started many years ago (1987), but after that the primary support mechanism seems to have been support for R&D and encouraging the universities to support directions that work with where TSMC is headed.
If you're going to keep going on about "Taiwanese govt funding of TSMC" I think the onus is on you to provide some data and some explanations as to this claim. Because as far as I can see it is baseless.
whatthe123 - Friday, January 28, 2022 - link
US already pushed conditions without even passing the chips act. They wanted to expand wafer production in china and were told not to. It seems contingent on US oversight.SteelBox - Saturday, February 5, 2022 - link
For relative subsidy comparison across countries, see Exhibit 8 on Page 19 here: https://www.semiconductors.org/wp-content/uploads/...SoftFox - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
For correction on the analysis. Gross margin is the difference between revenue income from sales minus only direct production costs, labour, materials etc.The margin drop could be a number of factors. For one example, higher materials cost during current substrate shortage. If this was unable to be offset adequately enough by higher ASP cost then this would be a negative financially. Pressure from AMD might have limited Intel's position to raise prices enough.
R&D and any other expenditure for future facilities etc comes out in part from Net Income, which is why this has probably dropped as it invests its way out of its current foundry position.
ABR - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
Shift to 10nm and lower yields probably also hitting margin.zepi - Thursday, January 27, 2022 - link
How about graphing the process nodes on logarithmic scale?ballsystemlord - Tuesday, February 1, 2022 - link
I second the motion.Abort-Retry-Fail - Sunday, January 30, 2022 - link
Uhhhh ...
The "Fairchild 7" (or 8?) led the way in out-sourcing in the 1950s and 1960s, primarily to Malaysia and Hong Kong. In the USA, IC development was seriously funded by subsidies, incentives and tax breaks with the military (DARPA) the space program(s), and Nuke development.
--SO--
I guess it is dependent on 'whose ox is being gored' globally at the local, state and federal levels ...